news
Indo-Lanka agreement on ECT:
* Govt. sticking to yahapalana commitment says SJB MP
* JVP asks whether selling national assets panacea for all our ills
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Samagi Jana Balavegaya lawmaker Dr. Harsha de Silva yesterday (15) said that the SLPP government had adopted the previous administration’s strategy in respect of the East Container Terminal (ECT) at the Colombo Port having repeatedly decried what it earlier called the sale of the facility to India.
MP de Silva, who also played a big role in the previous administration said that the SLPP earlier strongly opposed the involvement of India and Japan in the proposed Public-Private Partnership (PPP) to develop the ECT.
The former UNP State Minister de Silva said that the government certainly owed an explanation as regards the SLPP’s turnaround having had exploited the ECT issue to the hilt in the run-up to 2019 Nov presidential election as well as 2020 parliamentary election.
Responding to another query, the senior SJB member emphasized that the SLPP’s stand had always been that the ECT would be under the exclusive control of the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA). Therefore, the Presidential Secretariat statement that the incumbent administration negotiated the ECT agreement afresh with the SLPA having 51 percent of shares and the rest for the foreign investor, MP de Silva said.
Having repeatedly promised the ECT would only be developed by the SLPA, no less a person than President Gotabaya Rajapaksa at a hastily arranged meeting at the Presidential Secretariat on January 13 announced the 51:49 basis between the SLPA and the foreign investor.
The Colombo District lawmaker said: “The Terminal Operating Company was always a 51:49 joint venture with the majority of shares with the SLPA.”
Minister of Ports Rohitha Abeygunawardena, Secretary to the President Dr. P.B. Jayasundera, Secretary to the Ministry of Ports, Chairman of Sri Lanka Ports Authority and other officials and representatives of 23 trade unions had been present at the discussion.
The presidential declaration meant that the SLPP went back on one of its major promises. What had really happened was the SLPP endorsed the previous government strategy on the ECT, MP de Silva said, urging the people to be mindful of their strategies.
The SJB MP stressed that the then Opposition deceived the country with its high profile campaigns in the run-up to national polls in 2019 and 2020. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa told port unions the ECT would be developed with 51 per cent owned by the government and the remaining 49% as an investment by India’s Adani Group and other stakeholders
One-time Ports and Shipping Minister and SLMC leader Rauff Hakeem, now a constituent of the SJB told The Island that the Indian investment therein was nothing but a foregone conclusion. The lawmaker who is afflicted with Covid-19 threw his weight behind the project.
MP de Silva said that Sri Lanka entered into a Memorandum of Cooperation (MOC) with India and Japan in May 2019 on the ECT. The then Ports and Shipping Minister Sagala Ratnayake signed the MOC on behalf of the yahapalana government. Dr. de Silva said that he responded to The Island queries as a parliamentarian of the SJB as the party was yet to take a stand officially.
The agreement on the ECT was the first major investment on ports and shipping sector since China secured strategic Hambantota port on a 99-year lease for USD1.1 bn in 2017.
Trade union sources told The Island that major political parties represented in parliament seemed to be on one page on the ECT issue. The SLPP and the SJB parliamentary groups consisted of 145 and 54 members, respectively. The JVP with just three MPs is alone in campaigning against the agreement on the ECT though port trade unions affiliated to major political parties opposed foreign investment therein.
Former JVP MP Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa alleged that successive governments were bent on parting with critically important national assets. The JVPer asked whether selling national assets was the panacea for Sri Lanka’s ills. If such a strategy paid off, Sri Lanka would have been in a much better position today, the former lawmaker said.
- News Advertiesment
See Kapruka’s top selling online shopping categories such as Toys, Grocery, Flowers, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Clothing and Electronics. Also see Kapruka’s unique online services such as Money Remittence,News, Courier/Delivery, Food Delivery and over 700 top brands. Also get products from Amazon & Ebay via Kapruka Gloabal Shop into Sri Lanka.
news
Test post
sdfsdf sdf sf sf sdf sf sdf
news
AG not bound by its recommendations, yet to receive report
PCoI on Easter Sunday attacks:
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC is not bound by recommendations made by the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (P CoI) into the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, or presidential directives in that regard, according to authoritative sources.
They said that the AG couldn’t under any circumstances initiate legal proceedings until he had received the full PCoI report.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa received the PCoI report on Feb 1. The President’s Office delivered a set of PCoI reports to Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena on Feb 23, a day after the report was presented to the cabinet of ministers. The Island raised the matter with relevant authorities in the wake of a section of the media reporting the PCoI recommending punitive measures against former President Maithripala Sirisena, Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, IGP Pujitha Jayasundera, Chief of State Intelligence Senior DIG Nilantha Jayawardena, Chief of National Intelligence retired DIG Sisira Mendis and All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) leader and Samagi Jana Balavegaya MP Rishad Bathiudeen et al over the Easter Sunday carnage.
Sources pointed out that due to the inordinate delay in sharing the PCoI report with the AG, the department hadn’t been able to take preliminary measures required to initiate the proceedings. Sources said that a team of officers would take at least six weeks or more to examine the report before tangible measures could be taken.
With the AG scheduled to retire on May 24, 2021, even if the AG Department received the P CoI it would be quite a tough task to initiate proceedings ahead of retirement, sources said. However, in terms of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution enacted in last October, both the AG and the IGP could receive extensions beyond 60 at the President’s discretion.
Dappula de Livera received an Acting appointment as the AG a week after the Easter Sunday carnage whereas his predecessor Jayantha Jayasuriya, PC, was elevated to Chief Justice.
Responding to another query, sources said that the Attorney General two weeks ago requested Secretary to the President for a copy of the P CoI. However, the AG was yet to receive one, sources said. In spite of the AG not receiving a P CoI copy, the AG had instructed the IGP to obtain a copy of the report when he requested the police to complete investigations into the Easter Sunday carnage. The AG issued specific instructions after having examined police files pertaining to the investigations.
The IGP, too, hadn’t received a copy so far though some sections of the report were in the public domain.
Agriculture Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage displayed at a live political programme on Derana a copy of the P CoI report he received at the cabinet meeting earlier in the day.
Sources said that the Attorney General’s Department couldn’t decide on a course of action in respect of the Easter carnage on the basis of a section of the report. In terms of the Commission of Inquiry Act (Section 24), the AG enjoyed significant powers/authority in respect of investigations; sources said adding that the Department urgently required both the P CoI report and police investigations report. The Attorney General’s Department has raised the delay in receiving a P CoI report amidst the Catholic Church attacking the government over the same issue.
Sources said that ministerial committee appointed to study the P CoI report couldn’t decide on how to proceed with the recommendations and the matter was entirely in the hands of the AG. Sources pointed out that the delay on the part of the government to release the report had received the attention of sections of the international media, including the New York Times. Public Security Minister retired Rear Admiral Sarath Weerasekera having met Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith at the Bishop’s House on Dec 8, 2020 said that the AG would get a copy of the P CoI report once the President received it. Minister Weerasekera said that the CID had handed over the relevant files after having completed investigations into eight blasts. Referring to the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) report on the Easter Sunday carnage, the former Navy Chief of Staff said that all such documents would have to be brought to one place and considered before initiating legal proceedings. Acknowledging that there could be delays, lawmaker Weerasekera said that on the instructions of the Attorney General a 12-member team of lawyers was working on the case. The minister vowed to expose the mastermind behind the Easter Sunday attacks. Investigations continued while some of those wanted were overseas, the minister said.
The minister acknowledged that the Attorney General couldn’t proceed without the P CoI report. Minister Weerasekera reiterated that once the President received the P CoI report, it would be sent to the Attorney General. The minister said that there were documents two to three feet high that needed scrutiny. The minister assured comprehensive investigation. The minister said that investigations pertaining to eight blasts had been completed and the reports handed over to the AG. However, the Attorney General had found shortcomings in those investigations.
news
JVP picks holes in PCoI report
By Saman Indrajith
The Presidential Commission of Inquiry on the Easter Sunday bombings had failed to identify the mastermind of , the JVP said yesterday.
Addressing the media at the party headquarters in Pelawatte, JVP Propaganda Secretary MP Vijitha Herath said that the PCoI report had levelled accusations against former President Maithripala Sirisena, former IGP and head of intelligence for their dereliction of duty, shirking of responsibilities and not taking action to prevent the attacks and negligence. There were reference to the causes of the terror attacks and actions to be taken to avoid such attacks and the influence of extremist organisations. “However, there is no mention of the mastermind of the attacks, the handlers of the attackers and those whose interests the carnage served. It is also not mentioned whether there has been any foreign or local organisation behind those attacks. As per the PCoI report the attack took place as a result of culmination of extremism.
“According to the PCoI the extremist activities were a result of the prevailing political situation then. The entire nation was waiting to see who was responsible and who masterminded those attacks. The PCoI has failed to identify the true culprits responsible for the terror attacks. The report says that the leader of the suicide cadres killed himself in the attacks and it was a puzzle. That means those who are actually responsible for the attacks are still at large. The report does not provide exact details of the sources of the attacks. The PCoI had sittings for one year and five months. It summoned various persons and got their statements but it has failed to shed any light on the terror attacks. Everybody knows that the top leaders of the government and heads of security and intelligence establishments failed in their duties. Ranil Wickremesinghe was the second in command and he too is bound by the responsibility but the PCoI report fails to identify him as one of the persons against whom legal action should be instituted. The PCoI has treated Wickremesinghe and former President Maithripala Sirisena differently. We are not telling that this report is a total failure but we cannot accept this as a complete report. The PCoI handed over its report to the President on Feb 1. After 23 days it was sent to Parliament. Now, a copy of the report is there in the parliamentary library for the perusal of MPs.”
Herath said that the PCoI did not have powers to take punitive action. “It only has powers to name those responsible and recommend action to be taken against those named.